Popular Post Anakin7 Posted April 5, 2015 Popular Post Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) Elder Holland's talk was Awesome [ A Mozart spiritual uplift ] and then Elder Uchtdorf follows with another Awesome talk [ a Picasso uplift ] I am feeling on a spiritual High right now. How about everyone else ?. I wonder how our critics will view these in connection to our True Doctrine/Teaching on our spiritual condition and journey and how we get back to our spiritual Mansion Kingdom Home. The Atonement, It is The Central Doctrine In His Debt/Grace Anakin7 Edited April 5, 2015 by Anakin7 5
The Nehor Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 They are going to dissect Elder Holland's insistence that there was an Adam and Eve and a literal garden. 3
Tacenda Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) They are going to dissect Elder Holland's insistence that there was an Adam and Eve and a literal garden.I love Uchtdorf's sermon on Grace, yahoo!! Edited April 5, 2015 by Tacenda 3
Rivers Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) They are going to dissect Elder Holland's insistence that there was an Adam and Eve and a literal garden.There's always going to be something to nit pick no matter how good a talk is. Edited April 5, 2015 by Rivers
carbon dioxide Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) They are going to dissect Elder Holland's insistence that there was an Adam and Eve and a literal garden.If Adam and Eve did not exist, there really is no reason to believe Christ existed. It is sort of like believing the Book of Mormon is true but also saying that Nephi and Lehi were fictional characters. People will always complain and declare something did not happen because they don't have the proof that it did. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Edited April 5, 2015 by carbon dioxide 3
Coreyb Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 For the first time in my life, reading on another forum, I found out the GoE has a sexual component, am I that naive?Also I love Uchtdorf's sermon on Grace, yahoo!!Well, that's debated in mormonism
Tacenda Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 Well, that's debated in mormonismI deleted part of my post. Didn't want to put with my comment about Pres. Uchtdorf.
Antoni Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 Pres. Uchtdorf's was superb and a great rebuttal to our critics about us claiming we're not saved by Grace. I can't wait to get a transcript of that talk and go over it many times as there was so much in there to ponder and study upon. 2
BCSpace Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 They are going to dissect Elder Holland's insistence that there was an Adam and Eve and a literal garden. No worries. It has already been demostrated that one can easily hypothesize a scenario that accepts all LDS doctrine on the creation and all science on the creation.
Rivers Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 No worries. It has already been demostrated that one can easily hypothesize a scenario that accepts all LDS doctrine on the creation and all science on the creation.Yeah. I liked how Elder Holland acknowledged that he didn't know what happened on the earth before Adam and Eve. That leaves open a lot of room for speculation on certain details. 4
Teancum Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 They are going to dissect Elder Holland's insistence that there was an Adam and Eve and a literal garden.Why? This is LDS doctrine after all.
The Nehor Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 Why? This is LDS doctrine after all.Yeah, but some few have strayed from it.
Garden Girl Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 Yeah. I liked how Elder Holland acknowledged that he didn't know what happened on the earth before Adam and Eve. That leaves open a lot of room for speculation on certain details. Me too, Rivers... I just know that there had to be a physcial beginning of "us" compared to any other beings that may have existed... GG
Teancum Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 If Adam and Eve did not exist, there really is no reason to believe Christ existed. It is sort of like believing the Book of Mormon is true but also saying that Nephi and Lehi were fictional characters. People will always complain and declare something did not happen because they don't have the proof that it did. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.I think in LDS doctrine this is true. I have asked other good Christians whether they think the need for a redeemer fails if there is not a literal Adam and Eve and fall and they think not.
Teancum Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 Yeah, but some few have strayed from it.Active members? I know personally I have doubts about a literal Adam and Eve and what to means for other things as well as how does one reconcile such persons with science and so on. But I have never argued that this was not essential doctrine.
canard78 Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 If Adam and Eve did not exist, there really is no reason to believe Christ existed. It is sort of like believing the Book of Mormon is true but also saying that Nephi and Lehi were fictional characters. People will always complain and declare something did not happen because they don't have the proof that it did. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.I don't think this is true. There doesn't have to be a literal, historical fall of Adam & Eve for the temple ceremony to be significant and nor is the atonement invalidated if they are no more than a creation myth. We teach that our own sins, not Adam's transgressions, are the things that will matter in the end. 2
carbon dioxide Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 I think in LDS doctrine this is true. I have asked other good Christians whether they think the need for a redeemer fails if there is not a literal Adam and Eve and fall and they think not.I don't doubt there are people out there that believe that though that does not make any sense. If there was no literal Adam and Eve there was no literal Cain and Abel or Seth. Since literal children can't be born to a parents that did not exist. Everything that is found in Genesis chapter 5 can't be literal which means there could not have been a literal Noah. Then the story of Noah and his children can't be literal and on and on it goes. The entire genealogy of Christ can be seen as not literal. So there really is no reason to say there was a literal Christ if there was no literal Adam and Eve. 1
ERayR Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 I don't doubt there are people out there that believe that though that does not make any sense. If there was no literal Adam and Eve there was no literal Cain and Abel or Seth. Since literal children can't be born to a parents that did not exist. Everything that is found in Genesis chapter 5 can't be literal which means there could not have been a literal Noah. Then the story of Noah and his children can't be literal and on and on it goes. The entire genealogy of Christ can be seen as not literal. So there really is no reason to say there was a literal Christ if there was no literal Adam and Eve. And the entire scripture becomes nothing more than one big fairy tale.
MorningStar Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 I often wonder how long it finally took for Adam and Eve to partake of the fruit. Maybe they were so obedient, it took a crazy amount of years of Satan working on them. 2
carbon dioxide Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 And the entire scripture becomes nothing more than one big fairy tale.If the beginning of is all based on fiction why believe anything else. I don't see how one can claim a literal Christ without a literal Adam and Eve. I don't believe one can have one without the other. 3
ERayR Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 I often wonder how long it finally took for Adam and Eve to partake of the fruit. Maybe they were so obedient, it took a crazy amount of years of Satan working on them. A long time or a short time it doesn't matter. The Garden of Eden was not the whole earth but was a small area compared to the whole earth. Time in mortality for Adams family began with the ejection from the Garden.
DBMormon Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) Weird.... But it appears elder uchtdorf just shared the same theology of grace that I have, and got flack for on here on mddb Edited April 5, 2015 by DBMormon
DBMormon Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 President Uchtdorf's talk dispelled many past incorrect teachings and offered some deep waters to drink from 1
Tacenda Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) Weird.... But it appears elder uchtdorf just shared the same theology of grace that I have, and got flack for on here on mddbI was so impressed with his talk! It's about time Grace in this church is put back to how it originally was taught. Thank you Pres. Uchtdorf! It's not Grace "after" all we can do, or "because" all we do. He wondered if we needed to re-interpret that scripture! Edited April 5, 2015 by Tacenda 1
Avatar4321 Posted April 5, 2015 Posted April 5, 2015 They are going to dissect Elder Holland's insistence that there was an Adam and Eve and a literal garden.quite possibly but why does it matter? If people want to ignore truth to nitpick it's their choice.
Recommended Posts